dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
Who's Caroline Lucas?
Nobody.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Caroline Lucas, sensible suggestion or sexist nonsense?
- Thread starter Green Cross Code Man
- Start date
Nobody.
No you haven`t. You said 49% of women voted leave when you meant 49% of the women who voted,voted leave. A massive difference !!
You may not understand figures percentages etc, but take it from me 49% of 72%(the proportion of people who voted) is 35.28%. Not the same as 49%.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 7,800
A complete irrelevance.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 23,598
Some would.
She's called this wrong. Most of the time she's pretty sensible and considered. There are moments where she goes a bit AWOL on common sense. I like her though.
Still, it's been worth it to see the frothy mouthed keyboard warriors. The internet sewers have over flown today.
She has apologised for not including non white women, she’s still perfectly happy for it to be outright sexist though.
She now just joins all the other MP’s for me who I have zero respect for which is pretty much all of them!
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
- Thread starter
- #126
She's had you debating it all day.
At a time when both major parties are in disarray, she should be leading the greens in an inclusive manner. I believe she has alienated many people, both male and female, who believe in equality. She embraces Orwell's idea that all of us are equal but some are more equal than others. So I stand by my point.
Not when pundits then say stuff like %!% voted to leave. It is NOT implicit this means 51% of the turnout. Especially when 'the people' crop up again and again in the discourse.
Lucas is a twit, by the way. I see she's now apologised for inviting only white women on to her imaginary cabinet. Talk about Mumsnet
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
- Thread starter
- #128
Of course I understand percentages. But I don't consider that relevant. 49% of women voted leave is completely true. As I said, I was quoting the total for all of those who had voted! If you want to include people who did not vote (mostly as they could not be bothered), then you should, without hard evidence, assume that they would broadly vote the same way. If you want to make a redundant mathematical point when I have pointed out that I was only quoting those who voted, well then you've gone way off topic as the whole point was that she did not include ANY women from parliament who voted leave and was therefore tribalistic and did not want to compromise although she claimed the opposite.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
- Thread starter
- #129
Not when pundits then say stuff like %!% voted to leave. It is NOT implicit this means 51% of the turnout. Especially when 'the people' crop up again and again in the discourse.
Lucas is a twit, by the way. I see she's now apologised for inviting only white women on to her imaginary cabinet. Talk about Mumsnet
But that is why it is so important to get out and vote, it is how democracy works here. The only voters that matter when the results of an election or referendum are counted are those that have voted. A large portion of the electorate disenfranchised themselves by choosing to not vote. Whichever way a vote goes, those people have rendered themselves powerless to change anything and in my opinion should not complain when things don't go their way. I don't think one side or other should indulge in whatabouterry regarding the possible percentages had everyone voted either. The referendum happened, the voters voted and we are stuck with that result.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
There are lies and deceit from Johnson, from Farage, from the ERG, cases of anti-semitism, islamophobia, cases of bullying in office, expenses scandals, funding of political campaigns. And the thing that has most upset you this week, is a female MP saying she's going to meet up with a few other female MPs to see if they can come up with any ideas.
She's not starting a movement, a group, a party, an organisation, anything other than inviting 9 other female elected leaders to have a chat. I mean really, lets just get over ourselves for a second.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Same news cycle as Farage insulting the Queen Mum, Prince Harry and the royal family, the UKIP leader looking to ban religious books, Johnson bringing back in stop and search without any research or data to back the decision. But some blow their top at Caroline Lucas inviting 9 other women for a chat.
How did Tony Blair win three GEs? He was damned good, that's how.
The trouble with the current lot is they are useless. Truth has to be rationed on occasions and compromises have to be spun. But you can do neither if you have no ****ing idea what success looks like or how to get here.
Bit more than a chat. Parallel cabinet to save Brexit, I thought it was
If you just want to chat with some ladies, do it discretely on the internet, FFS. Don't hold a bleeding press conference to announce your intentions!
As long as diversity are included I am happy .
As long as that includes people who either have a soft spot for a shit singing ensemble (
), or find grammar challenging () it will be 
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
- Thread starter
- #136
Haha, why are you supposing the thing that upset me most this week was Caroline Lucas? I am not in the least bit upset with her nor am I angry. The other things you mention are pretty well covered and almost all the time I am disinterested in Brexit as it has become so poisonous. Frankly, arguing the same old things re Brexit is boring. I refute your allegation, but were you to state that I found it interesting then I would concede, I think the inconsistency in her thinking is worthy of discussion as is her (imo) enormous own goal regarding equality. I had been considering voting green for the simple reason that environmental issues are the single most important issue facing our planet, but she has not impressed me in the slightest.
Neville's Breakfast
Well-known member
You haven’t come across as angry or upset at all. Difficult to know where that accusation comes from.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
- Thread starter
- #138
I have often noticed that people use those terms on this board for some reason. It is quite baffling. I wonder if it is self-reassuring?
Yes. Indeed. It just annoys me when gammon claim 51% of the British People voted for Brexit (and hard brexit, to boot). Like that very 'fact' justifies their position.
I have no problem with first past the post winner taking all with 51%, on a voter turnout of 65%. It is very sad, but so it goes. The electorate always get what they deserve, and deserve what they get. Even if they were lied to.
But....I have a problem with folk saying that with such an outcome, the decision must be upheld. This was an advisory, and indeed shambolic referendum. By all means let's hard Brexit, if that is the way the wind is blowing, but FFS people suggesting it is an immutable God-given destiny that must not be gainsayed or else the streets will run red with the blood of foreigners and lefties . . . . spare me.
Brexit won't affect me - I am 61, have a great pension, money in the bank, no mortgage.....If I were mischievous I'd be out there campaigning for hard brexit and banging the Boris drum, just for the pleasure of seeing the smiles wiped off the faces of all the deluded working class Brexit supporters when their things curl up like a plate of lettuce in the Californian sun after we drop out of the arse of the EU like an unregarded turd of yesterday's unremarkable lunch.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Calling a well respected member of the house of commons a liar I would suggest is getting upset. You obviously feel calling someone a liar is just normal self assuring debate?